Any thoughts?

[NicTrain35]

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...87&key=8122775

Any help is appreciated.

[Freericks]

Train looks like it is in the vertical center of the shot - also - am I wrong or is this cropped with a really short vertical? Recommend going to a more common ratio and putting the train a bit higher in the frame.

[JRMDC]

Looks a little below center to me, Charles. These things are always tricky and I never really understand exactly what is in the screener's mind. But the gap from top edge to top of engine is more than the gap from bottom of plow to bottom of frame. That is what I look at (when I care to look that closely, which is generally only after an RP rejection).

I would suggest cropping a bit on the right - that will push the nose further off the center horizontally - it's not on the center now, but I suspect RP wants it over more - and that will at the same time get closer to the common ratio that Charles points out.

You could also crop on the left, some would say too much distance over there and too much detail, although as of now I actually like the pole breaking up the monotonous foliage. If you do so, important all the more to cut some on the right.

[BobE]

edited comment below

[BobE]

Rule of Thirds strikes again.

Point of focus is the nose of the lead unit, and is sufficiently off center. Vertical cropping is OK if you can't add any useful information by adding sky or ground, although RP prefers photos in 4:3 ratio.

The problem I see is the distracting billboard in the background. Suggest shifting camera position to the left and screen the board with foliage.

[Freericks]

Looking again the height ratio (of the frame) seems correct. Not certain why it looked shrunk before.

That being said, I stand by my initial statement - the train is in the middle of the vertical plane (Bob E is commenting on the horizontal plane, which is correctly not centered).

[JRMDC]

I disagree with Bob in that, in my experience, RP shows no preference for 4:3 in comparison to several other formats, and in particular 3:2.

I have no problem getting on shots anywhere from 3:2 through 4:3 to 5:4, and sometimes can go "wider" than 3:2, even as far as 5:3. Within that range, the composition is what matters.

[BobE]

Charles, sorry I got my planes mixed up. No wonder I never got my pilot's license.

[WMHeilman]

Maybe go to a location that isn't generic and boring next time.

[CSX1702]

Originally Posted by WMHeilman

Maybe go to a location that isn't generic and boring next time.

What a helpful comment.

[NicTrain35]

PhotoID: 503447 Photograph © Nick Hart

Thanks everyone for the help.

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by WMHeilman

Maybe go to a location that isn't generic and boring next time.

Originally Posted by CSX1702

What a helpful comment.

184 views and 1 favorite since uploading it on the 24th. Maybe Y@ is on to something?

Loyd L

[MagnumForce]

Most of my stuff on here is 4:3, then again I shot with a 4/3 system camera for many years. I keep it at 3:2 now. Monitors used to be a 4:3 ratio, 1024x768

[WMHeilman]

I consider it helpful to try and direct people away from lame shots.

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by WMHeilman

I consider it helpful to try and direct people away from lame shots.

I just keep mine hidden for the most part

Loyd L.

[Freericks]

One man's lame is another man's interesting classic Beebe wedgie.

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Freericks

One man's lame is another man's interesting classic Beebe wedgie.

RP... honoring the memory of Lucius Beebe everyday.

Loyd L.

[coborn35]

Ahh the famous unit where idiots mounted the horn!

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Freericks

One man's lame is another man's interesting classic Beebe wedgie.

If Beebe hadn't done it, someone else would have. It was only a matter of time.